Categorization of the hemodynamic response to hemodialysis: The importance of baroreflex sensitivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality in hemodialysis (HD) patients. The baroreflex arc is under autonomic control and regulates blood pressure. This study aimed to investigate the contribution of impaired baroreflex sensitivity (BRS) to the pathophysiology of IDH. Thirty-four chronic HD (12 IDH-prone, 22 IDH-resistant) patients underwent BRS measurement during HD with relative blood volume monitoring. During analysis, patients were separated into four age-matched groups according to resting BRS>or=4.5 ms/mmHg and hemodynamic stability. Resting BRS was extremely heterogenous (geometric mean BRS 5.78+/-1.41 [range 1.76-41.41] ms/mmHg). Relative blood volume reduction was well matched in all groups (mean reduction in relative blood volume for all patients -6.74%+/-0.86%, P>0.05). Thirty-seven episodes of IDH occurred in the IDH prone, reduced BRS group. Patients with impaired resting BRS and prone to IDH had markedly different responses to HD as compared to the preserved BRS group, but the total peripheral resistance response was significantly lower than in the IDH-resistant patients (15.9%+/-2.1% vs. 42.4%+/-3.0%, respectively, P<0.001). In those patients prone to IDH and with impaired resting BRS, percentage reduction in cardiac output at the end of HD highly correlated with reduction in relative blood volume (r=0.94, P=0.006). Hypotension during dialysis may be an important source of recurrent cardiac injury and early recognition of those patients prone to relative symptomatic and asymptomatic hypotension remains important. Impaired resting BRS and recognition of a suboptimal peripheral pressor response, appear to predict those patients most likely to undergo hemodynamic instability and may assist in the pursuit of this elusive goal.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".